Alfie

Jude Law takes the title role in this remake of the 1966 flick that was the follow-up hit that confirmed Michael Caine as a star. He's been an enduring one, still turning them out, as British actors do, whenever he's asked. 130 movies, with three n various stages of production. Good on him.

But we're talking about the 2004 production, and Jude Law here. Remakes of classics always start with a disadvantage. Just as Caine undoubtedly had to contend with comparisons to Terence Stamp's performance in the original stage production (Stamp turned down the movie, and helped talk Caine into it, impelled, no doubt, by a hope that a good paycheck would get Caine out of his apartment and into his own flat). So lets get to it: Law plays a playboy, not uncaring, but happy with his life of plenty of women and no attachments, who comes to realize that's not what he wants. Caine played the same facade and base.... and then layered them with the coldness he plays so well. Law thinks he has it all; Caine brought an amount of misogynistic disdain into the mix. That might not play in the 21st century, but it's a more nuanced and interesting performance, watching Alfie's change from a cheap villain into his own victim.

Still, this is a handsome production, reset in New York City for no particular reason, and offering a good time. It's not a classic, but it is a good film.

Not a lot of people know this, but Terence Stamp first played the role of Alfie on stage over thirty years ago. He was then offered the film role, but turned it down. His flatmate, a struggling up and coming actor, tried to convince him to take the part, but Terence was not budging. And so his flatmate took the role. His name, was Michael Caine, and that film, Alfie, spring boarded the young actor to be the most famous cockney in the world. Of all Caine's films this ranks alongside Get Carter and The Italian Job as his best, and so why re-make it I hear you cry! Hollywood had a go at remaking The Italian Job and Get Carter but only came out with turkeys so big you couldn't fit them in your oven. But instead of remaking a Michael Caine film that wasn't good (THE SWARM, BLAME IT ON RIO!) Caine's golden classic Alfie has had the makeover, with pretty boy Jude Law bought in to ask what it's all about. Well for those who don't know what it's all about, Alfie's world is women, pulling them and dumping them. Sounds a little cold, but that is Alfie, a bird puller extraordinaire who lives for the conquests, but soon bores of them whenever commitment rears it's ugly head. Of course Alfie has to be bought down a peg or two, and this happens as a result of another conquest, which has further reaching consequences than Alfie can realize. But should Alfie have been dusted down for the 2004 audience? Well the answer is no. But why? Well, to analyse this we have to go back to the beginning and what Alfie was in Caine's day. Alfie was a man about town stuck in the poor end of London, sleeping his way through a never ending supply of 'birds' while fighting his working class shackles. Back then women were not the powerful sex they are today, at least not on the cinema screen, and were happy to get Alfie's dinner and scrub his floors. Now lets look at Jude Laws Alfie, living in present day New York, and sleeping with a seemingly never ending amount of stunners, who all seem to be getting as much out of him as he gets out of them. And so what's he got to fight against? Not his surroundings (he's in glamorous Manhattan) and his job isn't that bad (still a driver, but look at the perks), and he even likes the kid of one of his girlfriends. And so he's a nice guy, and there is problem 1, bang goes Alfie's cold side. And so what we are left with is a man who lives in New York and finds it hard to commit. Hardly a rare phenomenon. Problem number 2 is the original Alfie movie's use of the shock factor. Denholm Elliott turning up to do a back street abortion was enough to make some walk out the cinema in 1966. In this film the subject of abortion, although delicately handled, has lost it's cinematic impact, which is no doubt due to the three decades that has passed between films. And so we come to problem number 3, the films flaw being that the Alfie of today is simply not as relevant to the Alfie of yesterday. Today we have 'Sex and the City', empowered women, whom one can't help but feel would eat Alfie up alive. Indeed, the film would be more realistic if the lead was a female, although that would send traditionalists (like myself) running up the nearest tree. The makers of this re-make obviously think that illnesses has to be stepped up, and so while Caine's Alfie was given shadows on his lung to make him give pause, Law's Alfie gets a lump on his…erm…'Big Ben' (I hope to God that's not the new word for it) But what about performances? Well, Law as Alfie is fine, giving emotion where its needed, although his performance does not bounce along like Caines did. When Caine spoke to the camera, immediately breaking the fourth wall and bonding with the audience, it was the height of cool, when Law does the same it feels cheesy, and like cheese, it soon starts to grate. Susan Sarandon, as the sexy older woman, certainly fulfils her characters description, while Sienna Miller gives a promising portrayal as a young women who looks like a young Marianne Faithful (circa 1965) minus her Rolling Stone. And so the blame for the films failure cannot be left at its actors doors, nor its director. The film is simply a victim of its time. Alfie belongs in the sixties, when the world (or London at least) was swinging. Right now the only thing swinging is the cinema doors, and that's because I've just left.

The tagline for the new film 'Alfie' ask us, what's it all about? The answer, unfortunately, is that it's about sheer disappointment.

The film focuses solely on Alfie Elkins, a swinging young womanizer packed with style and a charm that could only be British. After an all too brief introduction to our protagonist and his long list of lady-friends, some kind of plot begins to develop – sort of. We move through far too many completely unrelated situations, all of which only have any relevance at all because of their connection to our main character.

The film does almost nothing to stay focused on a character or situation long enough to develop anything genuine; one minute we have the beginnings of a story with one girl, the next minute we're on to something completely different. You may hope that the film returns to these unfinished story arcs, but it rarely does. And those special times when the story comes back to something that was left unfinished, the film manages to once again leave the story too quickly, adding further loose ends and unresolved issues.

This episodic structure does give the film a pace that is representational of Alfie's dating life – constantly moving from one thing to another, never letting anything unfold – but this does not work to the advantage of the film. Rather than giving it an interesting structure that parallels the story, it creates confusion and disorientation, and even worse than that – a loss of the empathy for the characters that would be present if the film took the time to develop characters and stories properly.

In fact, just about everything in the film lacks conviction, particularly in the places where it is needed the most; moments that should provoke emotion tend to leave the audience wanting something more substantial, which once again is an issue with the film's poor use of development.

If it weren't for Jude Law's charming performance as Alfie Elkins, the film would collapse entirely under its own poor craft. Of course, this is not at all to say that Law saves the film; he does nothing of the sort. His performance, strong as always, just happens to stop the film from being a complete waste of time. His energy is strong and his talent is clear, but it is not enough to bring the film to that next level of quality.

The photography and cinematography, while positively beautiful at times, is staggeringly inconsistent and often not at all fitting to the film's needs. Portions of the film are very nicely photographed, which almost seems like a waste of talent. A spiffy paint job on a car may be appealing to the eye, but why even bother if the car doesn't have an engine? This is precisely what Alfie is all about: some nice looks and a fairly strong performance, but sadly there is no engine to be found.

... as I haven't (FAR too young when it originally came out!), and can judge the movie without preconceptions, it's actually quite, quite good. From others' comments, I believe this should be called a reconception rather than a remake - and face it, if they followed the original, time-bound character/plot, it really WOULDN'T work today - so there is no sense in decrying that this isn't slavish to the Caine version. On its own terms, the movie is very stylish, with excellent cinematography, directing and editing, and the acting is top-notch across the board [For Broadway aficionados, look for Tony winners Jefferson (I Am My Own Wife) Mays as the Doctor and Hairspray's Dick Latessa as Joe].

Law is disarmingly charming as Alfie, and that goes a long way in selling the character, and making his attitude towards women somewhat tolerable. Of the women, Sarandon {looking incredible for 58! ... and delivering her final coup de grace with devilish elan], Long, Krakowski and especially (surprisingly?) Law's current squeeze Miller all make strong impressions. Tomei is OK, but is really neither attractive or special enough to justify Law's interest in her [and his fixation on her young son is a little creepy/unbelievable for such a womanizer]. The substitution of the interracial dalliance with Long for the abortion is a stroke of genius, as it will probably have the same 'shocking' effect for some in the audience. Yes, the direct address is a little jarring at times, but is necessary and DOES follow the original.

On the minus side, the Mick Jagger/Dave Stewart music DOESN'T work, but Joss Stone's remake of the title song is effective. If you can forget, or better yet, haven't seen the original to compare this version to, I think you will find it a very entertaining, relevant movie (compared to most Hollywood remake dreck). I wouldn't even be surprised to find this garnering quite a few Oscar noms (given this year's weak field) come the end of the year... Give it a chance.

I enjoyed it a lot. But wish there was some kind of ending. The movie left us hanging. Wishing for more, there could have been the 2 part or something like that. Every girl that is fallen in love and with pink glasses should watch this and see how men really are. It shows the world view how the karma works sometimes. And that what's superficial isn't always a thing we should focus on but look deeper and do good while we are still on this earth. Reflect on our actions and I wish you all learned something from this movie as much as I did.